Organizations today are facing ever increasing challenges. The characteristics of the business world require them to be able to become intelligent organizations, discarding invalid norms and mental states and cultivating new and expansive thought patterns, for which it is essential to manage the information in each of them. The research that is summarized, proposes an information management procedure in Cuban raw material recovery companies, with the aim of improving and optimizing their decision-making processes. The inductive-deductive, systemic-structural, analytical-synthetic methods were used as theoretical research methods; and empirical, the interview, the survey, the documentary analysis and observation.Its importance lies in the fact that for the first time in the organization a formal approach to this problem is made. An information management procedure is proposed, the design of which is novel within the framework of the organization studied. In the procedure, the dimensions for the analysis were defined, and tools such as the OVAR method are used, which allow identifying the indicators of efficiency and effort, and the dashboard, which contributes to monitoring the indicators, and is mainly oriented to measure the effectiveness in meeting the objectives associated with strategic goals. It was validated using the criteria of specialists. Conclusions and recommendations are proposed.whose design is novel within the framework of the organization studied. In the procedure, the dimensions for the analysis were defined, and tools such as the OVAR method are used, which allow identifying the indicators of efficiency and effort, and the dashboard, which contributes to monitoring the indicators, and is mainly oriented to measure the effectiveness in meeting the objectives associated with strategic goals. It was validated using the criteria of specialists. Conclusions and recommendations are proposed.whose design is novel within the framework of the organization studied. In the procedure, the dimensions for the analysis were defined, and tools such as the OVAR method are used, which allow identifying the indicators of efficiency and effort, and the dashboard, which contributes to monitoring the indicators, and is mainly oriented to measure the effectiveness in meeting the objectives associated with strategic goals. It was validated using the criteria of specialists. Conclusions and recommendations are proposed.and it is mainly aimed at measuring effectiveness in meeting the objectives associated with strategic goals. It was validated using the criteria of specialists. Conclusions and recommendations are proposed.and it is mainly aimed at measuring effectiveness in meeting the objectives associated with strategic goals. It was validated using the criteria of specialists. Conclusions and recommendations are proposed.
Analytical-synthetic: to develop the analysis of the object of study (both theoretical and practical), through its decomposition into the elements that comprise it, thus determining the variables that most affect and their interrelation as a result of a synthesis process.
Inductive-deductive: to diagnose information management, and to design the proposed procedure.
Systemic-structural: to address the systemic nature of the company and organizational management.
This phase is of vital interest to achieve the commitment and participation of all those involved, important actions in this regard are training and teamwork. For the formation of the working group, the participation of specialists from all areas of the organization will be taken into account, the management team and representatives of the different organizations that make it up, actors from the environment such as customers, suppliers and the community may be invited.. The training actions must be dosed throughout all the phases of the procedure, following the principle of executing them at the precise and necessary time in accordance with the requirements of each one of them.To detect the training needs related to the operation of the group, it is established that it analyzes the past and present of information management, complying with the principle of learning by doing.
It is carried out through the metric version 3 methodology, which has the following phases: information inventory, interview with managers and design of the questionnaire to collect information on information management in the organization. As a result of its application, there will be a description of the information structure in the organization in order to outline its flows, the elements necessary to generate an information inventory, and the processes, logics and limits that make it possible to shape the informational map of the organization's activities. Metric 3, defines the flow diagram as an appropriate technique to clearly reflect the movement of data through its transformations as a result of the execution of processes.For its application, the processes that are developed must be broken down successively, from the general level, up to the level of detail necessary to reflect all the semantics that the study system must support. Finally, it is intended to collect important elements of the organization in terms of the use and treatment of information and to determine the weak and strong points of the system for its subsequent analysis.
In this phase, the indicators that allow evaluating and issuing criteria on the current performance of the system in the organization must be determined. Based on the strategic objectives defined by the organization and the application of an interview to the managers of the entity, the strategic information challenges and action variables will be determined to achieve the desired objectives, as well as those responsible for their execution, depending on of information management, for which the application of the OVAR method is proposed, which is a tool of the Management Control System (SCG) widely used in modern international literature for its quality of focusing on the essential aspects on which there are than acting in a system, department, service or area of an organization.This action would derive the most relevant aspects on which to act to achieve the expected results within the system.
Now, to evaluate the indicators resulting from the application of the method, a questionnaire is designed which collects information on four fundamental variables: information needs and uses (information requirements and how the information is used); information resources (which includes the raw and processed information itself and its formats, the sources of information, services, systems, people, technologies, among other aspects); the information flows (which must analyze the input and output information from and to the environment, the movement of information within the organization, communication channels by q passes information cycles circulation of information, etc.); and theinformational culture (knowledge of staff about information management).
After the evaluation of the indicators and the processing of the variables, the action plans for each indicator are designed, the informational policies and strategies are proposed, with their consequent alignment with the other general, generic and functional policies and strategies with those that must coexist in the entity. 3.2.4 Phase IV: Control of the indicator system for information management.
For this, it is necessary to design the Command Board (TC), based on the flows and maps made in phase 2 of diagnosis: The team in charge of the Command Board must generate a small list of fundamental processes, identify which are critical for each strategic objective on the strategy map, and then assign a rating or weight to the ability of processes to achieve that objective. This will allow the organization to identify the strategic impact of each process. Processes that are highly weighted but offer little support are performance risks for the organization. Likewise, all significant processes must also be assigned a rating or hierarchy based on their impact to improve the performance of each strategic objective.
In this phase, an attempt should be made to reduce the gap between the information needs existing in the organization, found in the diagnosis, and the needs desired by the organization. In addition to proposing measures to minimize the action of the weak points of the management system analyzed.
- Validation of the procedure by the criteria of experts.
4.1 Determination of the experts.
To determine the scientific-methodological value of the procedure, the expert criteria method, Delphi variant (Campistrous, 2006), was used, which allowed enriching and perfecting the elaborated proposal. In addition, statistical techniques were used to process and interpret the results of applying the method used.
A sample of 31 experts was selected. According to the methodology used, in obtaining the knowledge coefficient (Kc) the assessment given by each expert on the scale on the knowledge they had on the subject was multiplied by 0.1. For this assessment, the knowledge coefficient is considered: high (0.8 ≤ Kc≤ 1), medium (0.6 <Kc ≤ 0.8) and low (Kc <0.6). In this sense, in the expert population evaluated, 21 presented a high Kc (67.7%), eight a medium Kc (25.8%) and two a low Kc (6.5%), which indicates that the 92% of the expert sample has a medium-high knowledge coefficient and their opinion gives validity to the research results.
For the determination of the argumentation coefficient (Ka) the criteria of high, medium and low, and the scale of the knowledge coefficient were used. From these results it can be inferred that the 31 (100%) surveyed have a high argumentation coefficient, as their score is equal to or greater than 0.8.
To determine the competition coefficient (K), from the integration of the previous results the following formula was applied: K = ½ (Ka + Kc). (Table 1). As a result of applying this procedure, it was found that twenty-one of the respondents had a high level of competence (67.7%) and ten medium (32.3%). The criterion to follow for the selection of experts was to consider those with a high or medium coefficient, and the results show that the 31 respondents met this criterion, with all respondents being selected as experts.
4.2 Validation of the procedure.
For the validation of the experts, the following attributes were included:
- Phase 1 of the proposed procedure (I 1). Phase 2 of the proposed procedure (I 2). Phase 3 of the proposed procedure (I 3). Phase 4 of the proposed procedure (I 4). Phase 5 of the proposed procedure (I 5). Relevant procedure (I 6). Applicable procedure (I 7). Generalizable procedure (I 8).
Five categories were used to evaluate the described aspects, C1: very adequate; C2: quite adequate; C3: adequate; C4: not adequate and C5: not adequate.
The results of the absolute frequencies matrix (Table 2) show that all the experts considered the aspects put in their consideration very adequate. No expert evaluated the research proposal as inappropriate.
The results of the cumulative absolute frequencies matrix are shown in Table 3. While for the compilation of the cumulative relative frequency table, the value of each cell in the previous table was divided by the number of experts consulted. The quotient of this division should approach up to ten thousandths and if they are equal, the columns are eliminated. In this case, columns C2 to C5 are ignored because their values are equal to one (Table 4).
Later, the images of each of the values of the cells in the previous table were searched for, by the inverse of the normal curve (Table 5). This result allows asserting that the experts consulted consider the eight (8) evaluation criteria as Very Adequate and demonstrates the value of the proposed procedure for evaluating the information management carried out by the author.
Conclusions:
Once the presentation of the procedure for the evaluation of the Information Management System is completed, the following is considered:
- The proposal of the model that supports the procedure constitutes a practical contribution to the issue of information management. The procedure is structured in a coherent way and is considered of great validity for the evaluation of information management in organizations. The procedure allows the use of information management as a process for the development of improvement programs that contribute to the achievement of the strategic objectives of the organizations. The procedure was validated by the criteria of experts, for which reason positive evidence of the relevance and feasibility of the same, confirming a unanimous criterion regarding the importance and novelty of the application of the proposed methodology.
Bibliographic references:
Ballester, CA (2009). Improvement of the information system for decision making in the commercial department of ETECSA Camagüey. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Camagüey, Cuba.
Barrios, FN (2001). Model for the management of information resources at the University of Havana. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Havana, Cuba.
Campistrous, L. and Rizo, C. (2006). Expert judgment as a method in educational research. Higher Institute of Physical Culture "Manuel Fajardo", Havana, Cuba.
Calderón, J. and Rodríguez, C. (2012). A management approach of critical factors for the success of information systems in the Venezuelan metal-mechanic SME. Accounting and Administration, volume 57 (1), 79-102.
Comas, RR; Nogueira, RD and Medina, LA (2014). Management control and information systems: proposal for a support tool. Industrial Engineering, volume 15
(2), 214-228.
Days, M. (2011). Reflections on the development of new technologies in the organization and representation of information. Information science, volume
42 (1). Retrieved on January 20, 2014, from www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=181418901008.
González, GML (2008). Procedure for planning the Demands of Personal and Collective Protection Equipment in ETECSA. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Havana, Cuba.
González, GMV (2007). Procedure to carry out information audits in hotel facilities. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Holguin University, Cuba.
Kendall, K. & Kendall, J. (1997). Analysis and design of systems. (3 ed.) Mexico: PrenticeHall.
Portela, L. L (2002). Information management systems, the cornerstone of the comprehensive management strategy. In: Memories I Iberoamerican Conference on Systems, Cybernetics and Informatics. Florida: International Institute of Informatics and Systems, 196.201.
Villardefrancos, Á. MC (2005). Proposal for a comprehensive model to audit information organizations in Cuba. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Havana, Cuba.
Table 1: Determination of the coefficient k for the selected experts
| Expert | Ka | Kc | K | Proficiency levels |
| Expert 1 | 0.8 | 0.80 | 0.8 | Tall |
| Expert 2 | 0.8 | 0.80 | 0.8 | Tall |
| Expert 3 | 1.0 | 0.90 | 0.9 | Tall |
| Expert 4 | 0.9 | 0.90 | 0.9 | Tall |
| Expert 5 | 0.9 | 0.90 | 0.9 | Tall |
| Expert 6 | 0.8 | 0.70 | 0.7 | Medium |
| Expert 7 | 0.8 | 0.70 | 0.7 | Medium |
| Expert 8 | 0.9 | 0.40 | 0.6 | Medium |
| Expert 9 | 0.9 | 0.60 | 0.7 | Medium |
| Expert | 0.8 | 0.70 | 0.7 | Medium |
| Expert | 0.8 | 0.80 | 0.8 | Tall |
| Expert | 1.0 | 0.90 | 0.9 | Tall |
| Expert | 0.8 | 0.50 | 0.6 | Medium |
| Expert | 0.8 | 0.80 | 0.8 | Tall |
| Expert | 0.8 | 0.90 | 0.8 | Tall |
| Expert | 0.9 | 0.80 | 0.8 | Tall |
| Expert | 0.9 | 0.60 | 0.7 | Medium |
| Expert | 0.8 | 0.60 | 0.7 | Medium |
| Expert | 0.8 | 0.80 | 0.8 | Tall |
| Expert | 1.0 | 0.80 | 0.9 | Tall |
| Expert | 0.8 | 0.70 | 0.7 | Medium |
| Expert | 0.8 | 0.60 | 0.7 | Medium |
| Expert | 0.9 | 0.80 | 0.8 | Tall |
| Expert | 0.9 | 0.80 | 0.8 | Tall |
| Expert | 0.9 | 0.80 | 0.8 | Tall |
| Expert | 0.9 | 0.80 | 0.8 | Tall |
| Expert | 0.9 | 0.90 | 0.9 | Tall |
| Expert | 1.0 | 0.80 | 0.9 | Tall |
| Expert | 0.9 | 0.90 | 0.9 | Tall |
| Expert | 1.0 | 0.80 | 0.9 | Tall |
| Expert | 0.8 | 0.90 | 0.8 | Tall |
Table 2 Matrix of absolute frequencies
| Items | Very suitable | Quite adequate | Adequate | Not adequate | Not adequate | TOTAL |
| I 1 | 31 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 31 |
| I 2 | 27 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 31 |
| I 3 | 28 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 31 |
| I 4 | 25 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 31 |
| I 5 | 31 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 31 |
| I 6 | 17 | 14 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 31 |
| I 7 | 28 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 31 |
| I 8 | 25 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 31 |
| TOTAL | 212 | 36 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 248 |
Table 3: Matrix of accumulated absolute frequencies
| Items | Very suitable | Quite adequate | Adequate | Not adequate | Not adequate |
| I 1 | 31 | 31 | 31 | 31 | 31 |
| I 2 | 27 | 31 | 31 | 31 | 31 |
| I 3 | 28 | 31 | 31 | 31 | 31 |
| I 4 | 25 | 31 | 31 | 31 | 31 |
| I 5 | 31 | 31 | 31 | 31 | 31 |
| I 6 | 17 | 31 | 31 | 31 | 31 |
| I 7 | 28 | 31 | 31 | 31 | 31 |
| I 8 | 25 | 31 | 31 | 31 | 31 |
| TOTAL 212 | 248 | 248 | 248 | 248 |
Table 4: Table for determining cut-off points
| Items | C1 | Sum | Average
Row |
N-
Avg. |
| I 1 | 0.0
0 |
0.00 | 0.00 | 0.14 |
| I 2 | 1.1
3 |
1.13 | 1.13 | -0.99 |
| I 3 | 1.3
0 |
1.30 | 1.30 | -1.16 |
| I 4 | 0.8
6 |
0.86 | 0.86 | -0.73 |
| I 5 | 0.0
0 |
0.00 | 0.00 | 0.14 |
| I 6 | 0.1
two |
0.12 | 0.12 | 0.02 |
| I 7 | 1.3
0 |
1.30 | 1.30 | -1.16 |
| I 8 | 0.8
6 |
0.86 | 0.86 | -0.73 |
| Sum | 5.5
8 |
5.58 | ||
| Cut points | 0.7
0 |
